Arxiv:2105.08654V1 [Math.DS] 18 May 2021
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX BOX MAPPINGS TREVOR CLARK, KOSTIANTYN DRACH, OLEG KOZLOVSKI, AND SEBASTIAN VAN STRIEN Abstract. In holomorphic dynamics, complex box mappings arise as first return maps to well-chosen domains. They are a generalization of polynomial-like mapping, where the domain of the return map can have infinitely many components. They turned out to be extremely useful in tackling diverse problems. The purpose of this paper is: - To illustrate some pathologies that can occur when a complex box mapping is not induced by a globally defined map and when its domain has infinitely many components, and to give conditions to avoid these issues. - To show that once one has a box mapping for a rational map, these conditions can be assumed to hold in a very natural setting. Thus we call such complex box mappings dy- namically natural. Having such box mappings is the first step in tackling many problems in one-dimensional dynamics. - Many results in holomorphic dynamics rely on an interplay between combinatorial and analytic techniques. In this setting some of these tools are - the Enhanced Nest (a nest of puzzle pieces around critical points) from [KSS1]; - the Covering Lemma (which controls the moduli of pullbacks of annuli) from [KL1]; - the QC-Criterion and the Spreading Principle from [KSS1]. The purpose of this paper is to make these tools more accessible so that they can be used as a `black box', so one does not have to redo the proofs in new settings. - To give an intuitive, but also rather detailed, outline of the proof from [KvS, KSS1] of the following results for non-renormalizable dynamically natural complex box mappings: - puzzle pieces shrink to points, - (under some assumptions) topologically conjugate non-renormalizable polynomials and box mappings are quasiconformally conjugate. - We prove the fundamental ergodic properties for dynamically natural box mappings. This leads to some necessary conditions for when such a box mapping supports a measurable invariant line field on its filled Julia set. These mappings are the analogues of Latt`es maps in this setting. - We prove a version of Ma~n´e'sTheorem for complex box mappings concerning expansion along orbits of points that avoid a neighborhood of the set of critical points. arXiv:2105.08654v1 [math.DS] 18 May 2021 Date: May 19, 2021. Acknowledgments. The research of the second author was partially supported by the advanced grant 695 621 \HOLO- GRAM" of the European Research Council (ERC), which is gratefully acknowledged. We would also like to thank Dzmitry Dudko and Dierk Schleicher for many stimulating discussions and encouragement during our work on this project, Weixiao Shen and Mikhail Hlushchanka for helpful comments. 1 THE DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX BOX MAPPINGS 2 Contents 1. Introduction2 2. Examples of box mappings induced by analytic mappings 13 3. Examples of possible pathologies of general box mappings 21 4. Dynamically natural box mappings 26 5. Combinatorics and renormalization of box mappings 32 6. Statement of the QC-Rigidity Theorem and outline of the rest of the paper 37 7. Complex bounds, the Enhanced Nest and the Covering Lemma 43 8. The Spreading Principle and the QC-Criterion 53 9. Sketch of the proof of the QC-Rigidity Theorem 59 10. Sketch of the proof of Complex Bounds 62 11. All puzzle pieces shrink in diameter 67 12. Ergodicity properties and invariant line fields 67 13. Latt`esbox mappings 73 14. A Ma~n´eTheorem for complex box mappings 79 References 84 1. Introduction f V Figure 1. The first return map to V . In dynamical systems, a natural and effective way to understand the detailed behavior of a given map f is to consider the first return map under f to a certain set V , see Figure1. In this way, if the orbit of a point under iteration of f intersects V infinitely many times, then the first return map will send each point of intersection to the next point of intersection along the orbit. Therefore, by iterating the first return map instead of f, one can study THE DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX BOX MAPPINGS 3 properties of certain orbits of f \at a faster speed". However, there is a trade-off: the first return map might have a rather complicated, even undesirable,1 structure. In the analytic setting, a return map might have the structure of a polynomial-like map. A polynomial-like map is a holomorphic branched covering F : U ! V of degree at least two between a pair of open topological disks U ⊂ V such that U is relatively compact in V . The restriction of a complex polynomial to a sufficiently large topological disk in C is an example of a polynomial-like map. Such mappings are an indispensable tool in the field of holomorphic dynamics due to their fundamental role in renormalization and self-similarity phenomena. However, in general, the topological dynamics of a return mapping even under a polyno- mial cannot be described by a polynomial-like mapping. This motivates and explains the need for a more flexible class of mappings, namely, complex box mappings (see Figure2): Definition 1.1 (Complex box mapping). A holomorphic map F : U!V between two open sets U ⊂ V ⊂ C is a complex box mapping if the following holds: (1) F has finitely many critical points; (2) V is the union of finitely many open Jordan disks with disjoint closures; (3) every component V of V is either a component of U, or V \U is a union of Jordan disks with pairwise disjoint closures, each of which is compactly contained in V ; (4) for every component U of U the image F (U) is a component of V, and the restriction F : U ! F (U) is a proper map2. Figure 2. An example of a complex box mapping F : U!V. The com- ponents of U are shaded in grey, there might be infinitely many of those; the components of V are the topological disks bounded by orange curves. The critical points of F are marked with crosses. 1For example, a component of the domain might not properly map onto a component of the range. 2In [KvS], where the definition of complex box mapping was given, the requirement that F maps each component of U onto a component of V properly was implicit. THE DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX BOX MAPPINGS 4 In the above definition of complex box mapping we assumed that each component of U and V is a Jordan domain. In some settings it is convenient to relax this, and assume that each component U of U and V of V a) is simply connected; b) when U b V , then V n U is a topological annulus; c) has a locally connected boundary. In Section 6.2 we will discuss why and when the theorems in this paper will go through in this setting. In one-dimensional holomorphic dynamics, it is often the case that the first step in understanding the dynamics of a family of mappings is to obtain a good combinatorial model for the dynamics in the family. Once that is at hand, one can go on to study deeper properties of the dynamics in the family, for example, rigidity, ergodic properties and the geometric properties of the Julia sets. It turns out that complex box mappings are often part of these combinatorial models. Indeed, recent progress on the rigidity question for a large family of non-polynomial rational maps, so-called Newton maps [DS] made it clear that complex box mappings can be effectively used in the holomorphic setting well past polynomials: by \boxing away" the most essential part of the ambient dynamics into a box mapping one can readily apply the existing rigidity results without redoing much of the theory from scratch. These developments motivated us to give a comprehensive survey of the dynamics of such mappings. The subtlety is that Definition 1.1 is extremely flexible and thus allows for undesirable pathologies: Pathologies of General Complex Box Mappings. There exists • a complex box mapping with empty Julia set, • a complex box mapping with a set of positive measure that does not accumulate on the postcritical set, and • a complex box mapping with a wandering domain. These examples are given in Section3. We go on to introduce a class of complex box mappings, called dynamically natural (see Definition 4.1), for which none of these pathologies can occur. This class of mappings includes many of the complex box mappings induced by rational maps and real-analytic maps (and even in some weaker sense by a broad class of C3 interval maps), see Section2. Moreover, quite often general complex box mappings induce dynamically natural complex box mappings, see Proposition 4.5. We go on to give a detailed outline of the proof of qc (quasiconformal) rigidity of dy- namically natural complex box mappings. This result was first proved in [KvS] relying on techniques introduced in [KSS1]: QC Rigidity for Complex Box Mappings. Every two combinatorially equivalent non- renormalizable dynamically natural complex box mappings (satisfying some standard nec- essary conditions) are quasiconformally conjugate. We state a precise version of this result in Theorem 6.1. For the definition of combina- torial equivalence of box mappings see Definition 5.4. A dynamically natural complex box THE DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX BOX MAPPINGS 5 mapping is non-renormalizable if none of its iterates admit a polynomial-like restriction with connected filled Julia set; renormalization of box mappings is discussed in detail in Section 5.3. Since the proofs in [KvS] and [KSS1] are quite involved, and part of [KSS1] only deals with real polynomials, we will give a quite detailed outline of the proof of quasiconformal rigidity for complex box mappings (our Theorem 6.1).